git@vger.kernel.org mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org,
	Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>,
	Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>,
	Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] fetch: increase test coverage of fetches
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2022 08:59:21 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqy2282jrq.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Yg9Bkyp1EDvOzzOp@ncase> (Patrick Steinhardt's message of "Fri, 18 Feb 2022 07:49:55 +0100")

Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:

> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 12:41:33PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:
> [snip]
>> > +test_expect_success 'atomic fetch with failing backfill' '
>> > +	git init clone3 &&
>> > +
>> > +	# We want to test whether a failure when backfilling tags correctly
>> > +	# aborts the complete transaction when `--atomic` is passed: we should
>> > +	# neither create the branch nor should we create the tag when either
>> > +	# one of both fails to update correctly.
>> > +	#
>> > +	# To trigger failure we simply abort when backfilling a tag.
>> 
>> What does this paragraph want the phrase `backfilling tags` to mean?
>> Just from end-user's perspective, there is only one (i.e. if an
>> object that is tagged gets fetched and that tag is not here, fetch
>> it too), but at the mechanism level, there are two distinct code
>> paths (i.e. if OPT_FOLLOWTAGS gets the job done, there is no need to
>> call backfill_tags()).  Which failure does this talk about, or it
>> does not matter which code path gave us the tag?
>
> It refers to `backfill_tags()`. Should I update this comment to clarify?

After reading the patch, the issue is only about the case where we
perform the second fetch and the case where OPT_FOLLOWTAGS does
everything necessary is not relevant.  So hinting that we are
interested to see what a failure in the follow-on fetch does to the
atomicity would be a good idea, and mentioning backfill_tags() would
have been a good way to do so.  Perhaps like "whether a failure in
backfill_tags() correctly aborts..." or something?

Thanks.


    


  reply	other threads:[~2022-02-18 16:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-02-17 13:04 [PATCH v2 0/7] fetch: improve atomicity of `--atomic` flag Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-17 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] fetch: increase test coverage of fetches Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-17 15:18   ` Christian Couder
2022-02-21  7:57     ` Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-17 20:41   ` Junio C Hamano
2022-02-17 22:43     ` Junio C Hamano
2022-02-18  6:49     ` Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-18 16:59       ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2022-03-03  0:25   ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-03  6:47     ` Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-17 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] fetch: backfill tags before setting upstream Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-17 22:07   ` Junio C Hamano
2022-02-17 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] fetch: control lifecycle of FETCH_HEAD in a single place Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-17 22:12   ` Junio C Hamano
2022-02-17 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] fetch: report errors when backfilling tags fails Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-17 22:16   ` Junio C Hamano
2022-02-17 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] refs: add interface to iterate over queued transactional updates Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-17 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] fetch: make `--atomic` flag cover backfilling of tags Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-17 22:27   ` Junio C Hamano
2022-02-17 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] fetch: make `--atomic` flag cover pruning of refs Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-17 15:50 ` [PATCH v2 0/7] fetch: improve atomicity of `--atomic` flag Christian Couder
2022-02-17 22:30   ` Junio C Hamano
2022-02-21  8:02 ` [PATCH v3 " Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-21  8:02   ` [PATCH v3 1/7] fetch: increase test coverage of fetches Patrick Steinhardt
2022-03-03  0:30     ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-03  0:32       ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-03  6:43         ` Patrick Steinhardt
2022-03-03  6:49           ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-03  6:51             ` Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-21  8:02   ` [PATCH v3 2/7] fetch: backfill tags before setting upstream Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-21  8:02   ` [PATCH v3 3/7] fetch: control lifecycle of FETCH_HEAD in a single place Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-21  8:02   ` [PATCH v3 4/7] fetch: report errors when backfilling tags fails Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-21  8:02   ` [PATCH v3 5/7] refs: add interface to iterate over queued transactional updates Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-21  8:02   ` [PATCH v3 6/7] fetch: make `--atomic` flag cover backfilling of tags Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-21  8:02   ` [PATCH v3 7/7] fetch: make `--atomic` flag cover pruning of refs Patrick Steinhardt

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=xmqqy2282jrq.fsf@gitster.g \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=christian.couder@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jonathantanmy@google.com \
    --cc=newren@gmail.com \
    --cc=ps@pks.im \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).